MAC Semi-Precious Collection: Overall & Recommendations

Each summer, MAC’s mineralize-themed collection is one that seems highly anticipated, but ultimately, I’m more let down than excited over it after trying it all out. This year is, ultimately, not very different. I find this launch overwhelming–is it necessary to launch twelve, limited edition eyeshadows all at once?–and I think that might show with the inconsistencies in color payoff, texture, and quality.

The five Cremesheen Glasses and four lipsticks are consistent with past launches and formulas for all of those. The lipsticks are surprisingly wearable and seem like they should work across skin tones, which is owed to the sheerness of the color. Though Musky Amethyst is labeled frost, it feels more like a lustre (which the other three are). I do find lustre lipsticks drying and that they only last two to three hours (a little below average). I wish Cremesheen Glasses were either less expensive or contained more product, because they’re a miss in terms of value (and always will be).

In my experience, mineralize products do not seem to wear as long as regular, pressed powders. I find this to be true in the mineralize blushes, skinfinishes, and eyeshadows. I typically get around six hours of wear with the blushes and skinfinishes, and the wear with the eyeshadows seems to depend on just how much work I put into them and the color payoff when dry, because they can fade within two to three hours or last closer to five or six.

The mineralize blushes seem to be the best products out of the collection, because they have soft, natural finishes and blend easily against the skin, though their softness can make them too easy to sheer out. I did find Warmth of Coral did not show up well on my NC25/NC30 skin tone. With the mineralize skinfinishes, they seem a little less glittery than past variations. Crystal Pink seems to be the most unique, just because it has a certain cool undertone running through it.

No matter how much I want to love mineralize eyeshadows, I just can’t. For $20 a pop, I really shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to make them work. The way they look in the pan doesn’t translate to the eye–even from swatch to lid, I never see the depth show up on the lid. The majority of this batch of mineralize eyeshadows need to be used damp/wet in order to get good color payoff. However, the problem is that they don’t stay wet and the dry down is somewhere between dry and wet, but the result is a little faded. The best results are using a sticky base or something like MAC Water-Based Mixing Medium (which has a slight adhesive quality) and/or a colored base, then you need to pat on, avoid blending as much as possible, and cross your fingers.

My experience with reduced wear time (as compared to the average wear of these types of products) makes me hesitant to list anything mineralize as a must-have. I think Gem of Roses offers something that MAC’s permanent range doesn’t have and is not a color we see launched every few months by MAC, and for that reason, it is the only item on the must-have list, even though it is a little drying to me.

Check your stash for…

Skip if you have…

Skip GEO PINK if you have SO BAD (limited edition); the former is a little more opaque and the latter has more glitter.

Skip LUSH AMBER if you have FRECKLETONE (permanent); unless you need something a little less warm.

Skip MUSKY AMETHYST if you have ODYSSEY (permanent); unless you are looking for something sheerer.

Skip WARMTH OF CORAL if you have PEACHES (permanent); they ended up being rather similar.

Skip QUARTZ FUSION if you have CRANBERRY (permanent); the latter being slightly darker.

Skip HINT OF SAPPHIRE if you have GIORGIO ARMANI #3 EYES TO KILL INTENSE; as it is really just a better, more pigmented and multi-faceted version.

Skip RARE FIND if you have THEBALM CURVY CAMI; the latter being more pigmented.

Recommendations by Skin Tone

Please note that this section is merely suggesting shades that would complement a particular skin tone better than other shades, but these lists are meant to be rather exhaustive of the entire collection; it’s not reflective of must-haves for your skin tone. When it comes to cooler/warmer skin tones, these are products that lean noticeably cool/warm and therefore complement the corresponding skin tone better (but it does not mean you can’t wear a warmer product if you’re cooler!).

52 Comments

Discussion and debate are highly encouraged, and we expect community members to participate respectfully. When asking a question, please check the post above for information regarding pricing, availability, dupes, and availability, and keep discussion on-topic. If you have general feedback, an off-topic question, or need technical support, please contact us.

Comments that include advertisements, self-promotion, insults, etc. may be in violation of our comment policy and subject to deletion. Please see our comment policy for more information.

Awesome! Thanks, Christine! Think I’m going to pick up Gem of Roses for sure. And then probably MSF Pearl and One of A Kind Lipstick. We’ll see though, student budget here needs to be expanded to accomodate all of the new MAC collections coming out!

Thank you for your recommendations, Christine! Do you think Pressed Amber would look good on pale, cool skin? I really like the concept of a brown blush, either for contouring or just for a little color, but I’m not sure whether this certain kind of color would look good on my skin…

Thanks for your honest review! I think I’m going to have to spend my money towards Chanel which has a much more consistent (and beautiful) fall collection. I’ve been disappointed with MAC lately and hope they can redeem themselves with the Gareth Pugh line.

It’s interesting that you find the Lustre lipsticks drying. Lustre is my favorite formula because it’s so comfortable on my dry lips. Mineralize blushes and MSFs also last just as long on me as any other blush. Go figure. Thank you for your always helpful reviews. I had no idea Geo Pink was so similar to So Bad and I’m going to skip a lot of other things I might’ve otherwise spent my money on.

I prefer the Lustres too, in finish and presentation. As we age, I think we should not be drawing massive amounts of attention to our lips, which have lost collagen if we aren’t blowing them up like puffer fishes! Not that I’m old and busted — just sayin’. 8′)

Back in March or April when I had first heard about the collection I was so excited, but now it has fallen so flat. Originally I had planned to pick up so much stuff, but now I’m getting 3 of the 4 MSFs; Goldstone, Rose Quartz, and Pearl and then 2 lipsticks; Musky Amethyst and Gem of Roses. I hope the Mac Me Over collection is everything that I think it will be along with the other collections for fall. Oh and Christine thank you so much for all the work you put into this, it really shows that you put in so much effort, but that’s normal when it comes to this site.

thank you for being the voice of reason, Christine! I was planning on getting way too many things form the collection– now will limit myself to only a few of the best items. It’s too easy to get swept away in the frenzy of MAC LE collections and spend way too much on things that will collect dust!